Note: This is a seattlepi.com reader blog. It is not written or edited by the P-I. The authors are solely responsible for content. E-mail us at newmedia@seattlepi.com if you consider a post inappropriate.

If you could write the plan for energy efficiency at the federal policy level for the next few years – to get budget support with the current Republican-controlled Congress – what would be the key features?

First and foremost, Congress would continue to fund federal energy efficiency programs at current (fiscal year 2017) levels. These programs already are under-funded when one considers the massive return on taxpayer investment for each dollar used in the programs. And, Congress would refuse the White House proposal to eliminate the key efficiency programs that are helping so many American families and businesses.

These signature programs, which have enjoyed decades of bi-partisan support, include ENERGY STAR, which has driven innovation and saved consumers more than $34 billion on energy bills per year; the Weatherization Assistance Program that has improved the homes of more than 7 million Americans; and the ARPA-E program which is investing in new technologies that can make our energy system cleaner and more efficient.

The best national energy policy plan for America is to use every lever possible – from taxpayer investment to tax incentives to standards and codes – to make our economy more energy productive. The benefits to the country go far beyond environmental to include job creation, increased prosperity and global competitiveness.

What opportunities do the Republican administration’s promised infrastructure investments offer to energy efficiency?

It’s a huge opportunity. People often think of infrastructure as roads and bridges, but there’s so much more. We must look at the grid, water and sewer infrastructure, buildings and facilities. And once you start looking at those areas, which we all know are in dire need of upgrades, you realize the enormity of the potential energy savings.

Water and sewer infrastructure, for example, uses vast amounts of power, and we need to make sure any new projects we build are highly efficient. The good news is it will save money by reducing operating costs over the life of the project, and that will ultimately benefit the user or taxpayer.

We also believe there is tremendous opportunity for using energy saving performance contracts (ESPCs) in any infrastructure package. These allow governments and business to make efficiency upgrades with no outlay of capital up front and use the savings on energy bills to finance the cost of the projects. And, once the project has been paid for, the owner realizes all of the monthly energy bill savings. It’s really a win-win and something we think the Trump administration should look closely at. Again, you’re pulling in private capital, creating jobs, saving energy and reducing long-term operating costs, and doing all of that with very little upfront government spending.

In the course of 4 years there could be so many budget haircuts we hardly recognize agencies like EPA and programs like Energy Star. We could look at that as a unique opportunity for the next mainstream president. If you could advise her/him in 2020 or 2024 on how to rebuild those functions almost from scratch, how might they be different?

I disagree with the premise of the question here. We need to focus on working with this administration and getting them to see the value that federal energy efficiency programs deliver to taxpayers and businesses. The fact is the programs we have – like ENERGY STAR and WAP and appliance and equipment standards – work remarkably well. As they say, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

Of course we can be doing more, and we’ll be pushing new ideas around infrastructure, tax reform, systems efficiency, etc. But we also must protect what we have because these are very successful programs. And, thankfully, we see no congressional support for eliminating these decades old, highly successful programs that enjoy enormous bi-partisan support.

Presidents Obama and Trump have made wholesale policy using executive orders that are easily rolled back. Will utilities and big companies keep reducing emissions, even after regulations are slashed, expecting regulations to be restored?

I think utilities and big companies realize that we’re moving to a clean energy future. And the smart ones realize that energy efficiency is the fastest, cheapest and most effective way to reduce emissions and improve your energy portfolio. So companies are moving in that direction and will continue to do so.

But smart policy will get us there faster and in a more managed way. Regulations are needed to provide stability and predictability. No one in the business community wants to see a patchwork of regulations among the different states. So I am hopeful that with the help of the business community, we won’t see rollbacks to important efficiency regulations, utility policies and other policy drivers that are creating a more energy-productive economy today.

You talked about states in your Efficiency Exchange 2017 keynote address. We already know some states that will step up to fill the gap if federal protections are eliminated. What can cities,companies, consumers and shareholders do?

Just like the state and federal governments, cities can first lead by example by improving the efficiency of their facilities and infrastructure. They can show taxpayers that we can cut government spending and reduce harmful emissions, while putting local people to work doing efficiency upgrades. They can also encourage greater efficiency in their communities with local incentives and policies.

It is critically important that companies and consumers speak up to defend smart energy efficiency policy. We are working closely with our business partners to do that – and you’re seeing business engagement that is unprecedented. We had more than 1,100 companies sign a letter recently calling for Congress to fully fund ENERGY STAR.

We are making a strong business case for energy efficiency policy – that it improves productivity and makes our economy more competitive, and ultimately creates jobs.

Conservatives think and talk differently about energy efficiency. How is ASE repositioning, altering the marketing message of energy efficiency, to communicate in terms that keep energy efficiency from being dismissed altogether as a liberal cause?

I don’t believe energy efficiency ever has or ever will be dismissed as a “liberal cause” only. We’ve always been fiercely bipartisan, as reflected by our honorary board which features senior Members of Congress from both parties and both chambers.

I believe nothing epitomizes a conservative ethos more than using valuable resources as wisely as possible, and that’s our mission. There are huge economic, security and global competitiveness benefits as well as environmental benefits from making our economy more energy productive.

And we are emphasizing all of these – as we have for four decades. We are making the case that strengthening energy productivity isn’t just smart environmental policy, but it’s critically important economic policy as well.

Note: This is a seattlepi.com reader blog. It is not written or edited by the P-I. The authors are solely responsible for content. E-mail us at newmedia@seattlepi.com if you consider a post inappropriate.